Anonymous wrote:YNT caliber players hardly need any coaching. You could put them on a clueless parent coached team and they would still win games for the team.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure who the bashers are. My kid trained under NM and his DMV staff for more than six years. We also have experience with other local elite clubs. I literally had a parent tell me that NM was hands down the best girls coach in the area and he was a college coach who had coached his daughter thru u15 at another local ECNL club and he moved her to McLean. She was YNT player who ended up at an elite ACC program.
People have different preferences and NM might not be the best fit for some but there are just too many players who developed under NM to say anything other than he does a great job developing kids for the next level.
Re: recruiting, every club needs to recruit. I don't believe the SYC deal brought major numbers to McLean nor do I believe that the JV was done for the benefit of the Mclean ECNL Girls. My daughter's team added one SYC player and I think that player will tell you that playing under NM improved her game.
All this is spot on. I would add that several McLean/Union age groups added 1-2 SYC players. The agreement was never meant to strengthen the girls' side for McLean. It was meant to strengthen the boys' side (which didn't happen once SYC was given MLS Next through U18). It was also meant as a pathway for SYC girls but they still had to compete for spots with girls outside the Union partnership.
So the 2010 and 2011 teams are 1-2 players from SYC? Whatchu smokin’?
Reading comprehension is key. See above -- "several McLean/Union age groups added 1-2 SYC players." Didn't say ALL. That applies to all age groups, except for 2010 and 2011.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure who the bashers are. My kid trained under NM and his DMV staff for more than six years. We also have experience with other local elite clubs. I literally had a parent tell me that NM was hands down the best girls coach in the area and he was a college coach who had coached his daughter thru u15 at another local ECNL club and he moved her to McLean. She was YNT player who ended up at an elite ACC program.
People have different preferences and NM might not be the best fit for some but there are just too many players who developed under NM to say anything other than he does a great job developing kids for the next level.
Re: recruiting, every club needs to recruit. I don't believe the SYC deal brought major numbers to McLean nor do I believe that the JV was done for the benefit of the Mclean ECNL Girls. My daughter's team added one SYC player and I think that player will tell you that playing under NM improved her game.
All this is spot on. I would add that several McLean/Union age groups added 1-2 SYC players. The agreement was never meant to strengthen the girls' side for McLean. It was meant to strengthen the boys' side (which didn't happen once SYC was given MLS Next through U18). It was also meant as a pathway for SYC girls but they still had to compete for spots with girls outside the Union partnership.
So the 2010 and 2011 teams are 1-2 players from SYC? Whatchu smokin’?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not sure who the bashers are. My kid trained under NM and his DMV staff for more than six years. We also have experience with other local elite clubs. I literally had a parent tell me that NM was hands down the best girls coach in the area and he was a college coach who had coached his daughter thru u15 at another local ECNL club and he moved her to McLean. She was YNT player who ended up at an elite ACC program.
People have different preferences and NM might not be the best fit for some but there are just too many players who developed under NM to say anything other than he does a great job developing kids for the next level.
Re: recruiting, every club needs to recruit. I don't believe the SYC deal brought major numbers to McLean nor do I believe that the JV was done for the benefit of the Mclean ECNL Girls. My daughter's team added one SYC player and I think that player will tell you that playing under NM improved her game.
All this is spot on. I would add that several McLean/Union age groups added 1-2 SYC players. The agreement was never meant to strengthen the girls' side for McLean. It was meant to strengthen the boys' side (which didn't happen once SYC was given MLS Next through U18). It was also meant as a pathway for SYC girls but they still had to compete for spots with girls outside the Union partnership.
Anonymous wrote:Not sure who the bashers are. My kid trained under NM and his DMV staff for more than six years. We also have experience with other local elite clubs. I literally had a parent tell me that NM was hands down the best girls coach in the area and he was a college coach who had coached his daughter thru u15 at another local ECNL club and he moved her to McLean. She was YNT player who ended up at an elite ACC program.
People have different preferences and NM might not be the best fit for some but there are just too many players who developed under NM to say anything other than he does a great job developing kids for the next level.
Re: recruiting, every club needs to recruit. I don't believe the SYC deal brought major numbers to McLean nor do I believe that the JV was done for the benefit of the Mclean ECNL Girls. My daughter's team added one SYC player and I think that player will tell you that playing under NM improved her game.
Anonymous wrote:RP and KB will both be exposed soon enough.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:RP and KB will both be exposed soon enough.
Exposed for *what*, exactly? And who is going to do the “exposing”?
Anonymous wrote:RP and KB will both be exposed soon enough.